RicoS321

It's because you Spaniard fucks have ruined it all with yer shite weather. As I get my lettuce fae a local fairmer, I've got plenty.

Aye, I'm normally very critical of Deek's subs (cause they're usually pish), but he changed it up properly yesterday. The wind was terrible and everyone was struggling with very few players getting above a 5/10. It really needed something radical, and he went for it with the double sub and two defenders coming off, in a timely manner too (normally waits for the last ten minutes). He still did the 8 minute dither when bringing on O'Connor, which he normally reserves for the youngsters, where he ends up giving someone 3 minutes game time instead of 10. Jack man of the match for me if I had to choose anyone, although I'd probably give it to Deek for the changes. I wouldn't read too much into the game because the players really struggled with the conditions and they all had an off day. It was reassuring to win a game with such a poor performance, which is a positive. One thing was slightly worrying form yesterday which was Rooney's performance again. He didn't get into any good positions and was barely in the game. That's a few games now. I'm not convinced by Stockley, but on yesterday's performance he deserves to be in the team with a goal and a good assist.

Was that their left back? Good player like, very much stood out.

I like cricket.

Yas min Rocket, that's perfect ranting. I have to admit to having watched a good bit of Scotland rugger over the last few years and quite enjoying it as a sport. I see it was I do English fitba. I'm now at the stage where I am so comfortable in my understanding of what it is and who it's for that I can happily watch it objectively without the hatred that I held for so many years. With the commentary off obviously. It's like how I can happily interact with gays without constant fear of being bummed. Or watching the dons secure in the knowledge that the game in this country is a complete carve up and dead as far as sport is concerned, which I'll be doing the morn for the Partick game. Quite looking forward to it actually. Think we'll tank the cunts and Johnny Hayes will be like a new signing, and Niall McGinn will be like a new signing and Shinnie will be like a new signing...because we didnae sign anyone.

Their back 3 really didn't help us, it meant Tierney played really high up the pitch, nullifying Hayes completely. It worked well for them. We had the choice of matching up or staying with our tried and tested formation, and we sort of did neither for large parts. Like LADon says, McGinn and Rooney cut out the distribution to the fullbacks, but I thought they could have narrowed in a little and given us something to aim for on the break. McGinn has been playing really central of late and it's no coincidence that he's scoring more, but against a 5, we lost that width. We could have matched up with Considine dropping more centrally and Hayes and Logan as wing backs, but we always seem to fuck that one up for some reason (although it worked at Pittodrie when Quinn got the winner a while back). I think a 3-5-2 was our best bet. I can see why McInnes setup the way he did and it could have worked. The ball didn't stick with Rooney at any point in the game, and when he doesn't have Hayes belting in crosses, the weaknesses in his game (pace) really come through. If Stockley or Storey were just that little bit better at what they were brought in to do, I'd probably start either in this type of game.

I think Jack is a better midfielder than Shinnie, and I also think that he's been fairly decent in a lot of games this season. When he's been played consistently alongside Shinnie in that 2 he's been very good - that was the start of the season and in the last 6 games. When played alongside someone who is liable to go AWOL (McLean mainly, but previously Flood), his movement becomes much poorer and his distribution slower - it's very noticeable, to the extent that I reckon McInnes must tell him to do it. He has to be more cautious due to his partner being the opposite. I think we could get a lot more out of him here still. I think you're right though, his improvement has stalled and he could be doing better but I don't think that is relevant as he's still a good player. Shinnie looks fine to me, looked very fresh in recent games. A week off against Motherwell will do him good too! Your right, we're possibly thin(ish) on coverage, but my point was that we do have cover and unless we were going to get a player good enough for the first team I don't see the point in buying more. Pawlett, McLean, Hayes or even O'Connor in midfield wouldn't be first choice, but they can more than hold their own and wouldn't be the difference between winning and losing in that position. It's a question of risk I suppose. To me, the risk of not getting centre midfield cover is a risk worth taking (unless somebody brilliant was available). Focusing on a striker - May - was also the right call as he's likely to win us games. That it fell through was disappointing. Last January, if we'd missed out on May, I'd have been happy for us to go out and sign anyone just about as we really needed numbers. This season, I don't see that as a problem. The type of player available in January is probably along the lines of Tansey etc. (who are no better than playing Pawlett, McLean) and we'd probably have to pay money for them, and be landed with them for 2 seasons. Better to wait until summer in my opinion, shed some of the crap (Storey, Storie, Stockley and Pawlett for example) and get in one or two decent replacements.

This should be interesting. Either a fake leak, or some a pretty horrendous exec order. Either way, should bring things nicely to a head. At least we declared our interest nice and early with the offer of a state visit. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-executive-order-christian-pre-marital-sex-same-sex-marriage-abortion-wrong-religious-a7558691.html

I disagree to an extent. LA-Don says that our best central midfielder last night was our left back, but that blatantly isn't the case. Shinnie has clearly signed an extension as a centre mid, and in the same way as Jack isn't a right back, Shinnie isn't going to be a left back. That is clear. Given that information, do we still need a holding midfielder? The argument I had against the Draperites (far is he noo?) who were advocating getting a hard tackling midfielder is that we won't need a Draper or a Davidson, we need somebody better. Football has moved on, and just as Arneson wasn't good enough to play in midfield, neither is O'Connor or Draper and Davidson hasn't developed in the way St Johnstone probably hoped. Shinnie is a far more complete midfielder than any of those, in that he'll get up and down the pitch all day as well as being a strong runner with the ball. He's a similar build to Brown and strong in the challenge and has a fair streak of dirtiness when required. The second point I'd make is that the problems we had in previous seasons are now no longer an issue. In previous seasons we struggled with numbers and fitness toward the end of the season. We also struggled with players who could adapt to the shitey pitches and winter conditions where direct hoofball was the only option. However, both those issues are removed because of the winter break. Our first 11 will easily see out the season without an issue unless injured or suspended. Last year it would have been acceptable to fill our squad with Stockleys, Storeys, Burnsss etc. and they could be relied upon to provide cover. We're just not in that market this season. With Shinnie moving to midfield permanently and signing a new deal then we don't need another midfielder. Shinnie and Jack will be that partnership with McLean, Pawlett and Hayes providing adequate suspension cover. Christie is direct competition in the forward roll to replace Maddison, which will allow McLean to drop deeper at the expense of Considine, Shinnie or Jack to give a more attacking balance. Christie could be regarded as a game-changer, similar to Maddison. Assuming the above is correct (otherwise my point is shite...), then I think our January requirements changed hugely as it got closer, and I think our post-window games and late-window games strengthened this point. It became apparent that we were balancing too large a squad and dropping points trying to involve players that didn't need involved. The easy step was cutting back the numbers to ensure we have less pissed off players. Getting rid of Burns, Morris, Storie was the right call. We then needed to look to the window not to bring in more numbers, but to bring in players that are game-changers. We weren't looking for first team starters or solid squad fillers like previously, but guys that can come on and make an impact immediately and shake the opposition. Players in the mould of Josh Magennis (but actual footballers), or a very tricky winger. That type of player is difficult to come by in January as everyone is looking for one. Sounds like we went for May but didn't get a deal, which would have given us another game-changer perhaps. I would say that our requirements changed this season (unplanned for) and that has made our January a lot harder. It wouldn't have been acceptable to get another Burns, and we aren't looking for depth in numbers. Nor were we necessarily looking for a starter in any position in the first team (I'm sure if one became available that would have happened). Last season, someone like Tansey would have been fine to provide cover for midfield, Stockley for the winter months and so on, but we don't need that now. We can comfortably beat any team outside Celtic on our day and we'll be fit and strong enough to finish the season with the current first team. If anything, we could have afforded to lose a couple more in Pawlett and one of Stockley/Storey as they're not what we need.

Aye, proper tanking for the hun scum. Finally somebody actually plays fitba against them. Take note dons, they're nae very good (especially at the back).

Considine header? More like a pass back like.

Not the worst performance. At least we played the same team. Our first 11 is good, but a look to the bench shows a dearth of talent. Storey looks pretty clueless, but could have been on 10 minutes earlier as Rooney wasn't in the game. Hayes poor tonight. Thought Considine, Reynolds, Jack, Shinnie and McLean were decent. Taylor should be told just to kick it whatever way he's facing. We weren't good enough to win tonight, they're just a much better team who didn't look uncomfortable. I'd actually say Reynolds is somewhere close to being a good centre half again. Reading the game very well like he used to and playing to his strengths by not trying to play fitba.

Games are regularly ruined by sending offs, with the team losing a player going backs to the wall. I think it would ruin the flow of the game. 1 out of the 4 fouls that Shinnie committed toward his booking at the weekend was actually a foul, the rest were just poor decisions. Scott Brown would end up getting 90 warnings instead of a yellow.

...in England

Nah, his job is to represent the residents. That means those that come to him to object - in this case against the dons proposal. He'll have had a fair number of folk objecting, so he picks a side (based on political prudence) and fights that side. So he's representing them in the best way he possibly can by making hysterical comments not based on fact (he may or may not believe his hysterical pish). His job is definitely not to go through "due diligence" with the club, as he's not interested in their opinion before the planning decision, he's there to obstruct them. That's how politics works. If enough folk had hassled him, sent him email and turned up at his constituency office to speak to him about the benefits he'd be representing them. Because that is his job. A planning officer will weigh up whether his objections are pish or not, and quickly conclude that they are. Anyway, I'm just glad you didn't read the daily record.

I just cyber-bummed you. Right in the hoop. Because your gay.

Club just released this. http://www.afc.co.uk/stadium.php Some good stuff, I doubt the locals have a leg to stand on. The 12,500 has been reduced to 12,000....

My main objection to the system is that it isn't applied to specific statements. So now Donsdaft disnae ken why folks think he's a dick. Surely that's the point of them, otherwise it's just bullying.

What the fuck does that even mean?

Surely his job is to represent his constituents and this is just political prudence? It's a rock and a hard place for him really, isn't it? The residents don't want anything build, no compromises, so there's nothing for him to discuss with AFC. It'll go through regardless of his opinion, so why ingratiate himself to the club rather than the people who vote for him? It's not laziness, just that there is nothing for him to discuss. If the club get permission, then it would make sense for him to have a meeting to discuss parking and so forth. He's probably a dick like, but that's neither here nor there. Or you could just not read the Daily Record, that would help.

Interesting. Storie was a wee bit short in my opinion last season in certain areas and nae quite ready for the first team, however with some hard work on his part I think he could have made it. I automatically assume that the manager's caution is what holds these youngsters back, but we don't see what goes on behind the scenes I suppose. Whilst I still think there is too much caution shown by McInnes in blooding youngsters, perhaps I'm doing him a disservice if the youngsters are letting him down. However, that has to be two way, and Storie not putting in the work is an indictment of McInnes as much as the guy himself. Anyway, in centre midfield, I think we now have to put the whole Shinnie in left back thing to bed and accept that he sees himself as a central midfielder. He's played very well there on numerous occasions and him and Jack are definitely our best pairing. I think we should set him the challenge by getting another strong midfielder in there to compete for position, but I'm not convinced that this is the window to do that in, unless on a 6 month loan or something (I don't believe we'll have the available options in Jan). Our cover against injury is Hayes, Pawlett and if desperate O'Connor. We have limited time to do business, the midfield will just have to be a risk we take (I think a Shinnie suspension will be more likely than injury, so perhaps he can engineer a suspension against a pish team at home). I'd like to see a striker in with Storey (and perhaps Stockley) getting shipped. A full back to compete with Considine and perhaps another wide player on loan too to replace Burns.

Yep, that is correct. Nobody has seen him since he played for Oldham.

Based on what? The board are tight, but there nae stupid. They'll know Hayes is likely the difference between finishing second and third, and they'll know the value in finishing second over third, versus the drop in price if Hayes leaves in the summer. It's not like we're cashing in on a guy with six months left. Hayes is very consistent and he won't lose significant value between now and summer, especially if the player suggests he might look for a move. We're debt free, and the call to sell is no longer there in the way it was previously. Duncan Fraser managed to get £600K for Lee Miller (or was it Strachan doing his mate a favour?), so he kens how to drive a deal.

Nit, Livi. You're thinking of the other Argentinian guy who used to play for Killie then us: Gary MacDonald.

Taylor had one fantastic clearing header in the first half, which showed why he's in the team (cause it's nae for his ability to kick the fitba), and he's been quite solid in our winning run.